Is the Old Testament really that important for Christians? Why?
Because its the bible you fucking retard
>>497280
Not really. I mean, they don't follow 90% of the laws given in it, and they don't really draw upon its imagery or themes.
>>497280
Its the origin story.
>>497296
But who decided it should be in the bible? And what was their justification?
Dear Marc wazzzz ap
>>497280
Lel demiurge, I don't think so.
Some books are though, really important in OT
I think Jesus was actually trying to stop the OT misgivings, hemmed why the Jews hated Him.
>>497306
It is the bible.
>>497321
The Bible is a collection of different stories, someone put it together, it didn't just fall to earth in its current form
Is there a point in the bible as a whole
>>497342
I don't have a fedora pic so you'll just have to imagine one
Pentateuch is pretty important, there's a lot of historical stuff nobody cares about after that
>>497306
The Canon (the approved list of books) is something that took a long time to form, with the final list as we know it coming around by the fifth century. Lots of debates about what should be put in and what shouldn't among the early Church fathers until they reached a consensus of sorts.
Everything else was left on the cutting room floor like that one Gospel where Jesus was riding a dragon. These are what we call the Apocrypha.
Then Lutherans and Calvinists decided that a few books weren't worth keeping.
Is there a point in the bible as a whole
>>497280
Very important. It's got a talking donkey in it.
>>497376
Isn't that the NT you are talking about?
I thought the contents of the Tanukh / Hebrew Bible / OT had been basically established well before the birth of Jesus.
>Be Aaron's sons
>Throw salt and pepper or some shit on god when he appears
>Die
Didn't expect that
>>497418
Canon refers to the whole Bible.
The Catholic Old Testament has some books that are excluded from Jewish Scripture, mostly the minor ones like Tobit, Judith and Maccabees.
If it wasn't important the NT writers wouldn't be referencing the OT over and over again.
>>497418
>I thought the contents of the Tanukh / Hebrew Bible / OT had been basically established well before the birth of Jesus.
Fragments of all books of the Tanakh, with the sole exception of Esther, have been found @ Qumran.
>>497280
Christianity started out as a Jewish cult, still part of Judaism. It doesn't abolish old laws to make new ones, but elaborates on them with a new universalist context. The contents of the OT also help with understanding the idea of a messiah king of Israel, and knowing the history of Judaism up to the point of Jesus' life.
>>497468
The NT writers, for the most part, only had vague knowledge of the OT though. You could jump into the NT only knowing that the OT has some books like Isaiah and prophets that claim Jesus' coming, and you're not worse off.
>>497507
That might be true for the Gospel of Mark, which is targeted at a Gentile audience, but in Revelation, the references to Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, etc. are not some simple: "The Messiah has come. TL Note: Messiah means Christ."
To reference all those books the NT writers must've read them, even if superficially or in a Greek translation.
>>497280
just the part that says the gays are bad, and everything else that convenient for their ideology.
>>497280
It is incredibly important, it is the prophecy and building up of the messiah, aka: Christ. People followed Christ not just because miracles and the like but because he fulfilled prophecies of the Old Testament.
>>497702
>the part that says the gays are bad, and everything else
>singles out "the part that says the gays are bad" from "everything else"
Why do I sense a little bitterness and bias from you, anon?
>>497280
Only the ceremonial law, like sacrificing sheep and shit, was taken out. Other than that, all of it stands.
Matthew 5:8
"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
Really, most Christians do cherry pick their verses upon which they follow. But onto what this verse means, since Jesus died on the cross for our sins we no longer need to atone by sacrifices and rituals not set down by Christ. It did abolish some laws, but other laws it obviously didn't. If it deleted all the laws of the OT, then why does Jesus quote the ten commandments? Therefore, we must assume that the laws that are now considered null and void are the ceremonial laws.
tl;dr go fucking google it and talk to a priest. It is, but only certain parts.
>>498650
I don't remember him rebuilding the destroyed cities of Zion, ingathering the exiles, or ending war forever. Do you?
The Bible was not compiled by God himself, nor did he ever order such a book to be compiled.
How did these scriptures get deemed sacred? The early Church literally voted on the matter. They claimed that the HolyGhost/God/Jesus guided each voter in making that distinction. So, in the end it was merely humans raising their hands that subjectively deemed some scriptures sacred, and others not.
But you have to wonder, if every man there was being guided by the same Holy Ghost,why did they need a vote?
>>497418
>I thought the contents of the Tanukh / Hebrew Bible / OT had been basically established well before the birth of Jesus.
Only core contents. It's boundaries are still open. The Council of Jamnia which is said to close the Hebrew canon at the Protestant 66 book canon never happened and has been discredited.
In my opinion the Old Testament should mostly be discarded by Christians. It's for Jews, not for us. Does Yahweh seem anything remotely like Jesus to you?
inb4 le demiurge
>>497702
Oh yes, I forgot the OT wasn't canonized until fags started getting pissy in the 1960s.
Retard faggot, the AIDS must be decaying your mind.
>>498861
Jesus called that genocidal monster Yahweh his father. Gnostic heretic.
>>498861
Not a Gnostic, but how would you explain the extreme disparity between the characteristics of Jesus and of Yahweh within a Christian theology while still rejecting the concept that they may be separate beings?
>>498890
Yes, and Jesus also quoted the commandments and the scriptures, because there was no other way he could be taken seriously by anyone in his context, but his religion was completely revolutionary.
Also Judaism belongs to a specific tribe, Christianity is universal.
>>498902
I can't, that's the point. Something is off
>>497280
It depends, OP.....Are you Catholic (works will get you into Heaven) or Protestant (faith will get you into Heaven).
If you're Catholic, then yes, Mosaic Law is essential to being a Catholic and following a hierarchy aside by Jesus.
If you are Protestant, then no, Mosaic Law is not essential, since it's by faith in Jesus alone that you are saved.
This was a popular topic in the years 1500-1700.
/thread
I just saved you 5 hours
>>499063
>Catholic (works will get you into Heaven)
wow
>>499093
Wow what?
>>499097
Salvation through works is not catholic doctrine
>>497280
NT is like the original Star Wars trilogy
OT is like the prequels - not enjoyable or particularly informative, but sort of necessary to get a background for the main trilogy.
Apocrypha are kind of like ep 7-9, they kind of divide the fanbase, and older fans aren't keen on them
>>499117
But it is, which is exactly why Catholics preform the Eucharist and sacrament and confession, etc.
>>499135
No it isn't you fucking retard.
Salvation is through grace
>>499141
>Salvation is through grace
If someone believes this, that salvation is possible through grace alone and no sacraments, confessions, and Eucharist, then they're a Protestant.
Catholic doctrine does not believe salvation is possible through grace alone. I'm sorry.
>>499164
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a2.htm
>>498963
>I can't, that's the point. Something is off
Well, nig, that's exactly why early fringe Christian mystics came up with the concept of the demiurge in the first place.
>>498758
Does that include all of the retarded laws in levitictus?
>>499205
1961 God, our Creator and Redeemer, chose Israel for himself to be his people and revealed his Law to them, thus preparing for the coming of Christ. The Law of Moses expresses many truths naturally accessible to reason. These are stated and authenticated within the covenant of salvation.
1962 The Old Law is the first stage of revealed Law. Its moral prescriptions are summed up in the Ten Commandments. The precepts of the Decalogue lay the foundations for the vocation of man fashioned in the image of God; they prohibit what is contrary to the love of God and neighbor and prescribe what is essential to it. The Decalogue is a light offered to the conscience of every man to make God's call and ways known to him and to protect him against evil:
God wrote on the tables of the Law what men did not read in their hearts.13
1963 According to Christian tradition, the Law is holy, spiritual, and good,14 yet still imperfect. Like a tutor15 it shows what must be done, but does not of itself give the strength, the grace of the Spirit, to fulfill it. Because of sin, which it cannot remove, it remains a law of bondage. According to St. Paul, its special function is to denounce and disclose sin, which constitutes a "law of concupiscence" in the human heart.16 However, the Law remains the first stage on the way to the kingdom. It prepares and disposes the chosen people and each Christian for conversion and faith in the Savior God. It provides a teaching which endures for ever, like the Word of God.
1964 The Old Law is a preparation for the Gospel. "The Law is a pedagogy and a prophecy of things to come."17 It prophesies and presages the work of liberation from sin which will be fulfilled in Christ: it provides the New Testament with images, "types," and symbols for expressing the life according to the Spirit. Finally, the Law is completed by the teaching of the sapiential books and the prophets which set its course toward the New Covenant and the Kingdom of heaven.
>>499226
1965 The New Law or the Law of the Gospel is the perfection here on earth of the divine law, natural and revealed. It is the work of Christ and is expressed particularly in the Sermon on the Mount. It is also the work of the Holy Spirit and through him it becomes the interior law of charity: "I will establish a New Covenant with the house of Israel. . . . I will put my laws into their hands, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people."19
1966 The New Law is the grace of the Holy Spirit given to the faithful through faith in Christ. It works through charity; it uses the Sermon on the Mount to teach us what must be done and makes use of the sacraments to give us the grace to do it:
1967 The Law of the Gospel "fulfills," refines, surpasses, and leads the Old Law to its perfection.21 In the Beatitudes, the New Law fulfills the divine promises by elevating and orienting them toward the "kingdom of heaven." It is addressed to those open to accepting this new hope with faith - the poor, the humble, the afflicted, the pure of heart, those persecuted on account of Christ and so marks out the surprising ways of the Kingdom.
1968 The Law of the Gospel fulfills the commandments of the Law. The Lord's Sermon on the Mount, far from abolishing or devaluing the moral prescriptions of the Old Law, releases their hidden potential and has new demands arise from them: it reveals their entire divine and human truth. It does not add new external precepts, but proceeds to reform the heart, the root of human acts, where man chooses between the pure and the impure,22 where faith, hope, and charity are formed and with them the other virtues. The Gospel thus brings the Law to its fullness through imitation of the perfection of the heavenly Father, through forgiveness of enemies and prayer for persecutors, in emulation of the divine generosity.23
>>499227
1969 The New Law practices the acts of religion: almsgiving, prayer and fasting, directing them to the "Father who sees in secret," in contrast with the desire to "be seen by men."24 Its prayer is the Our Father.25
1970 The Law of the Gospel requires us to make the decisive choice between "the two ways" and to put into practice the words of the Lord.26 It is summed up in the Golden Rule, "Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; this is the law and the prophets."27
The entire Law of the Gospel is contained in the "new commandment" of Jesus, to love one another as he has loved us.28
1971 To the Lord's Sermon on the Mount it is fitting to add the moral catechesis of the apostolic teachings, such as Romans 12-15, 1 Corinthians 12-13, Colossians 3-4, Ephesians 4-5, etc. This doctrine hands on the Lord's teaching with the authority of the apostles, particularly in the presentation of the virtues that flow from faith in Christ and are animated by charity, the principal gift of the Holy Spirit. "Let charity be genuine. . . . Love one another with brotherly affection. . . . Rejoice in your hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. Contribute to the needs of the saints, practice hospitality."29 This catechesis also teaches us to deal with cases of conscience in the light of our relationship to Christ and to the Church.30
>>499229
1972 The New Law is called a law of love because it makes us act out of the love infused by the Holy Spirit, rather than from fear; a law of grace, because it confers the strength of grace to act, by means of faith and the sacraments; a law of freedom, because it sets us free from the ritual and juridical observances of the Old Law, inclines us to act spontaneously by the prompting of charity and, finally, lets us pass from the condition of a servant who "does not know what his master is doing" to that of a friend of Christ - "For all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you" - or even to the status of son and heir.31
1973 Besides its precepts, the New Law also includes the evangelical counsels. The traditional distinction between God's commandments and the evangelical counsels is drawn in relation to charity, the perfection of Christian life. The precepts are intended to remove whatever is incompatible with charity. The aim of the counsels is to remove whatever might hinder the development of charity, even if it is not contrary to it.32
1974 The evangelical counsels manifest the living fullness of charity, which is never satisfied with not giving more. They attest its vitality and call forth our spiritual readiness. The perfection of the New Law consists essentially in the precepts of love of God and neighbor. The counsels point out the more direct ways, the readier means, and are to be practiced in keeping with the vocation of each:
>>498758
I don't really know that this is a sound argument, though. Jesus himself, in that very verse, makes absolutely no distinction between "ceremonial law" and the rest of OT law, and neither did the Jews at the time. The distinction isn't even really implied, either. He literally says, "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law" which indicates far, far more strongly that literally not the smallest facet of OT law is made obsolete than it does even vaguely indicate that some ritualistic facets are made obsolete.
>>497280
Not as much as the New Testament. Books about the law of Moses are also pretty much irrelevant now because Christians have been freed from the law.
However there's still some pretty awesome stuff in the Old Testament.
>>499164
>Making shit up about the Catholic Church when you can clearly read about our beliefs in the Catechism.
That is the beauty of the Catholic Church; you can't setup strawmen because we have a system of authority, dogma, and teaching that you can go to and see if what you are imagining is true or not.
In this case what you are saying is not true.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a2.htm
>>500408
But is also speaks of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob who are technically the ancestor of Christ who also followed many of those laws.
>>499063
You can't /thread your own post, familia. ;)
>>501565
Too bad Baptist communion is heretical.
None of the Early Church Fathers actually took the Zwlinglian or Calvinist view of the Eucharistic presence.
They took the Realist.
Of the Protestants, Luther got it right. The rest got it wrong.
>>497702
Homosexuality is condemned in the New Testament too.
>>501580
Yeah. There's some important stuff in the Old Testament, but those guys were around before the law was made. All they had was circumcision.
>>497376
>Gospel where Jesus was riding a dragon
Cool. Where can I find this?
>>502563
The Luthers said it was a symbolic representation of Jesus' body and blood though. So do most protestants. I don't understand what you're saying here now. Also, what makes you the best authority on which was "right"?
>>497366
>there's a lot of historical stuff nobody cares about after that
Luke_shiggy.png
>>503396
Yes it is. Specifically, men who lie with men well not see the kingdom of God.
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
1 Corinthians 6:9&10
3 But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people. 4 Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. 5 For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a person is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
Ephesians 5:5-7
9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine
Timothy 1:9&10
7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.
Jude 7
>>503655
Luther was a realist. His main reason for hating Zwlingli and Calvin was precisely because of their non realist view of the Eucharist. I have the Church Fathers as my authority to show that the Realist view is taken as the original view of the Eucharist. Justin Martyr even compares it to a sort of second incarnation, making the bread and wine manifest into the body and blood of Christ
>>503655
Here's something for the heretics to think about
